Security Sales And Integration (SSI) Runs A Very Professional Organization, And That Counts

Dear John:

SSI does not undermine quality research and I do not say this because I am one of their long term technical writers. I say this because the persons at SSI run a very professional organization, and that counts.

Concurrently, innovation is awesome, albeit, I would hope that a better balance can be achieved based on my concerns.

Research by the organizations who I work with and/or am a member of follow a consensus based process, the scientific method and people are not paid, and their names and company names are always fully disclosed. By way of example, the NFPA, National Fire Protection Association.

In closing, I would ask you to consider reaching out to Scott Goldfine, the editor of Security Sales and Integration Magazine, and asking for his comment and feedback as well, and then offer him a one month free subscription. Maybe the way you innovate will catch on.

Best

Jeffrey

NOTICE: This comment was moved from an existing discussion: Do Not Operate Under A Veil Of Secrecy, Nor Would It Ever Be Acceptable To Act In Any Forum Without Disclosing Who You Are


Jeff, I made this its own discussion so it can properly and directly be addressed.

SSI does not undermine quality research and I do not say this because I am one of their long term technical writers. I say this because the persons at SSI run a very professional organization, and that counts.

Jeff, you provided no evidence supporting your position. You just declared it as if it was a regal degree.

Simply scan their home page and you know there is no dedication to 'quality research'. It's filled with them republishing press releases, like so:

And their recent focus on sharing surveillance video for entertainment:

Do you even look at the type of research we do? Just yesterday, e.g., Resolution Usage Statistics 2018 - Moving Up From 1080p and Hanwha Wave VMS Tested are ordinary things for us but far beyond what SSI ever does.

Finally, as for SSI's professionalism, SSI has so little shame that they are running a 'partner series' with manufacturers, like Dahua below:

That's an egregious conflict of interest and it shows in their reporting as they continuously avoid negative reporting on major news event like the Dahua hacking, the Hikvision backdoor, the Hikvision WSJ report / US Army base, etc. While this helps and supports their advertisers, it hurts their readers and the industry because they censor important industry information.

John:

I am extremely comfortable that my statements are accurate. Furthermore, this peer reviewed magazine has been providing invaluable services to the industry since 1979.

I know it and the industry knows it. Once again, I request that you reach out to Scott Goldfine, its editor, for any issues that "you" have with this magazine so he can respond accordingly.

As to your other statements, they are very disappointing.

Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey D. Zwirn, President, IDS Research and Development, Inc.

my statements are accurate

But you have yet again provided no evidence.

since 1979

It is 2018, literally a different era.

other statements, they are very disappointing

You mean the actual evidence I presented. Perhaps you should be disappointed in SSI. Maybe things were different 20 or 30 years ago but SSI is, what it is, today.

That said, as you requested, I will reach out to Scott Goldfine.

p.s. - Jeff, if you can actually present some evidence to counter mine, I would be appreciative and impressed.

p.s. - Jeff, if you can actually present some evidence to counter mine, I would be appreciative and impressed.

He can't, as I don't think there really is any counter-argument to your position.

Jeff came here trying to sell his product and got shot down, and now conflates the issue by discussing long established forum rules that he deems insufficient for his needs.

To say that an anonymous forum participant's position is invalid because he cannot see their credentials demonstrates a clear lack of knowledge in proper debate standards (position over the person). That's not to mention his constant dismissal of other's positions using his own first-person perspective. Expressing personal emotional positions distract from the core topic at hand, and does nothing to move the learning process that IPVM provides forward.

John, if relevant comments add value to the site (and I agree that they do), please do not give Jeff any more of a platform to sow irrelevancy. I want more quality IPVM content, not to see a nicely moderated and interactive forum debating on long-established, top-level rules that shouldn't even be changed.

since 1979

Let's leave Jeff there and move on.

To understand Jeff is to read his monthly fax newsletter.

Still sending Faxes in 2018? Well they do still sell a bunch of them in Japan. I can't remember the last time I faxed something here in the US.

I thought we all switched to Email? ;)

To Undisclosed Integrator #1. I am very pleased with the orders that I have received on the Interceptor since IPVM put my information on their site. In addition, many professionals who did not recognize the benefits of the Interceptor have provided me with awesome feedback. Notably, it was IPVM who decided to write the article on the Interceptor, not me, and this decision by IPVM was made after an industry professional referred my information to IPVM based on what he believed demonstrated an important product.

Making Alarm Systems Safer is mission critical and regardless of what you posit, the Interceptor does just that.

Further, it is my understanding that Scott Goldfine has been offered access to comment on IPVM. That said, any statements which provide negativity against SSI should be directed to them for comment. For me, I still believe in SSI, SDM Magazine and many others in the trade, and if anyone thinks that they are not important to the industry or are not professional, they should create a competing magazine. To date, I am not aware of anyone who has done that.

For me, I still believe in SSI, SDM Magazine and many others in the trade, and if anyone thinks that they are not important to the industry or are not professional, they should create a competing magazine. To date, I am not aware of anyone who has done that.

Print magazines are dying across the board. That you are not aware of anyone creating a competing magazine is because that era is ending.

IPVM is the antithesis to trade magazines being in bed with the manufacturers. Our influence and readership show that success.

As for the magazines, for seeing promotions and random industry things, LinkedIn is really replacing them.

John:

You have IPVM and the alarm and security industry has many authoritative sources for professionals to rely upon that do not follow your model, nor does your model match what trade publications offer. I hope that you are not inferring that organizations like the NFPA, AFAA, ESA SIA and ASCET are not authoritative and that they are not professional are you sir?

Authoritative in what? Certainly not in video surveillance.

As for SIA, related: IP Cameras Lose Buy America Protection.

ASIS International is the worlds largest security organization with over 33,000 paying members across all disciplines of security and the NFPA is even larger. Surely you are not disputing them as being authoritative are you?

'Authority' is a not a function of size.

And 'authority' is not universal, it is related to given domains. For example, you may consider yourself an authority or expert in alarms but you are certainly not on video surveillance as demonstrated by your being fooled by Paul's obvious sarcasm (lol "the top ip mfg - Pelco").

John:

Please answer my question because your comments are not germane to the issues at hand. Are you stating that ASIS International and the NFPA are not authoritative organizations? If they are not in your opinion, please provide me with any evidence that you have to support your position. Either way, if any member believes that ASIS and the NFPA are not authoritative please chime in.

Your other comments about me are not worthy of a response.

Respectfully submitted

Jeff,

Authoritative is obviously an issue of the domain. Is Harvard Business School an 'authority' in business? Yes. Is Harvard Business School an 'authority' in information technology? No.

Likewise, is ASIS an 'authority' in security management? Yes. Is ASIS an 'authority' in alarm systems or video surveillance? No.

Jeff, humor me. Are you an expert or authority in video surveillance? Yes or no?

John:

This is just one case where the court has qualified me as an expert in Video Surveillance Systems. I trust that you will not dispute the courts ruling.

Please also notice that the verdict was over $14,000,000.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, lets move on to the substance of the topic at hand.

That being said, if it is your position that ASIS International and the NFPA are not authoritative than this position is just remarkable. In other words, it would just defy logic. You have your position and I have mine. No further comment from me will be forthcoming, as people in the industry know that what I have posited is accurate.

I suggest that you do much better research to see what these internationally recognized organizations do and what they have achieved. It is amazing!

Case Study: George Elenbark vs. Steven Evans Rack Bar and Grill

George Elenbark v. Steven Evans and Rack’s Bar and Grill; Jane Spare, adminstratix ad prosequendum for the heirs at law and Estate of Mary Elenbark, deceased v. Rack’s Bar and Grill, Inc., Steven Evans, George Elenbark and Jerome Hope, No. CAM-L-2460-07; CAM-L- 854-08

Motor Vehicle: Motorcycle collided with drunken driver leaving bar

(P) $14,207,563.50
Alcohol Involvement, Negligence – Negligent Service of Alcohol, Dram Shop, Motor Vehicle – Motorcycle, Motor Vehicle – Passenger
George Elenbark v. Steven Evans and Rack’s Bar and Grill; Jane Spare, adminstratix ad prosequendum for the heirs at law and Estate of Mary Elenbark, deceased v. Rack’s Bar and Grill, Inc., Steven Evans, George Elenbark and Jerome Hope, No. CAM-L-2460-07; CAM-L- 854-08
Camden County Superior Court, NJ
Ronald J. Freeman
05-19-2010

Plaintiff(s):

Attorney(s):
  • Michael A. Kaplan; Jarve Kaplan Granato, LLC; Marlton, NJ, for Mary Elenbark, George Elenbark
  • Robert A. Porter; Bafundo, Porter, Borbi & Clancy, LLC; Marlton, NJ, for George Elenbark, Mary Elenbark

Expert(s):
  • Robert Wolf Ed.D., M.B.A; Economics; Cherry Hill, NJ called by: Michael Kaplan, Robert Porter
  • Joel Milzoff Ph.D.; Toxicology; Hartford, CT called by: Michael Kaplan, Robert Porter
  • John Wilkins D.O.; Psychiatry; Marlton, NJ called by: Robert Porter
  • Jeffrey Zwirn; Video Security Expert Analysis; Teaneck, NJ called by: Michael Kaplan, Robert Porter
  • Gregory Maslow M.D.; Orthopedic Surgery; Woodbury Heights, NJ called by: Robert Porter

Nice post, and I’m not being sarcastic :)

Interestingly, the common phrase “Hit and run” would be a misnomer in this case, as there need not actually be a ‘Hit’ for it to be illegal to leave the scene of an accident.

A couple questions, if you’re at liberty,

1) How did you determine the the video was tampered with?

2) What was your confidence level in that assessment?

3) Was your testimony challenged?

4) Was ‘The Rack’ charged criminally with tampering?

Thanks!

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you with further details in any forensic case which I work on, but I wanted to respond to John. In any event, it was a real tragedy and I am glad that my forensic investigation and testimony on this video surveillance system helped educate the jury to the verdict that was awarded to the Plaintiff in this matter.

I am glad to continue with the debate on ASIS and the NFPA, but anymore nonsense will simply be disregarded by me.

Respectfully submitted

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you with further details in any forensic case which I work on...

Just curious, (but not specific to this case), whether you are aware that certain VMSes, Milestone for instance, in certain circumstances, can delete seemingly random chunks of video, of seemingly random lengths, in the middle of an archive, even though the underlying drive is not at or near capacity?

...whether you are aware that certain VMSes, Milestone for instance, in certain circumstances, can delete seemingly random chunks of video...

This is a good example of an specific unexpected and consequential product behavior, that is unlikely to be mentioned between the covers of SSI, merely because of its unhelpfulness in selling those products.

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you with further details...

Why not? Did you not compose this:

The jury was shown evidence that Rack’s Bar had intentionally altered surveillance videos. The videos had segments missing and plaintiffs’ counsel contended that these were intentional alterations to the nearly 60 hours of relevant video footage, which they sought to confirm through the testimony of a video fraud expert.

The bar vehemently denied that any of the video surveillance cameras in its establishment had been tampered with and attributed the alleged “gaps” in the recovered videos to vagrancies in the surveillance system.

If your expert testimony is exemplar, what’s the problem?

The document was not composed or drafted by me.

Jeff, thank you for sharing your 'expertise' in video surveillance. Note: since you literally copied an entire page of your website as a comment, I've truncated it, showing the part where you are listed as an expert and including a link for readers to click through to read more. Including the whole page as a comment breaks the flow of the discussion.

I suggest that you do much better research to see what these internationally recognized organizations do and what they have achieved. It is amazing!

I have followed ASIS for years, read what they published in Security Management, etc. I have yet to see anything they have produced in video surveillance that comes close to what I would consider expertise.

You probably have a much lower bar.

For example, I am an expert in video surveillance technology and the video surveillance market (business / financials, etc.). I am not an expert in video surveillance installation. I am not an expert in access control either. Could a court that knows little to nothing about video surveillance or access control find me to be an expert, probably yes.

I'd recommend you scan through our camera book or some of our tests to really understand what expertise is in current video surveillance technology. Or scan through our recent business reports (like from our 2018 guide) to see the depth of expertise in the video surveillance market is.

Please respond to my comments.

Please go away.

An authoritative agency is not necessarily filled with all experts. I have more expertise with fire systems than CCTV and could point to a few things in the NFPA code that don't make sense, but are put there by people that supposedly know better than me. I've (probably we all have) had to deal with authority figures from the government that believe they are experts also.... but that leads down a road that we don't need to discuss right now.

John:

Long before and after IPVM was created many of these organizations were authoritative and experts in Video Surveillance and Systems.

By way of example, ASIS International has the probably the most educated and sophisticated members in the world, as it relates video surveillance and systems and other technologies as well. These members not only test equipment, but they actually specify, install same and are responsible for their continued operation. For brevity, this includes, but is not limited to law enforcement specialists from local and federal agencies, security specialists, and directors at most casinos around the globe, and as it relates to Video Surveillance for many high-risk applications. At the same time, I am sure that some of ASIS International members also subscribe to IPVM. Why don't you take out an ad in Security Management Magazine and tell its readers and members that they are not authoritative; that they are not credible; and that they are not video surveillance experts and see the results of what you "believe" to be true.

If you are against advertising, why don't you purchase a booth as an ASIS International Convention and test your opinion as elaborated to above. Better yet, I would be glad to have a debate with you at any United States ASIS International Convention, as to what you so boldly posited about and against, as it relates to ASIS International and its members, from Hawaii.

Without a doubt, your methodology of what is authoritative and credible would never pass muster by the technical community of the alarm and security industry. I look forward to your response and scheduling of the aforementioned. Furthermore, why don't you invite the board of ASIS International to this forum.

ASIS International also has a bookstore which requires peer review of each publication before it will be accepted into same and before ASIS International will agree to sell these books. Here are some of the books that are part of the ASIS Interntional Bookstore and are sold through ASIS. International.

This third edition of CCTV: From Light to Pixels, a high-level professional reference, has been expanded to cover all video compression techniques used in the ever-increasing assortment of digital video recorders (DVRs) available on the market today. In addition to demystifying DVR technology, the third edition also clarifies the technology of data networking and explains various compression techniques. Additionally, the book retains the essentials that made the previous editions convenient and valuable, including details of CCD cameras, lenses, coaxial cables, fiber-optics, and system design.

This book is beautifully illustrated with dozens of photographs, tables, checklists, charts, diagrams, and instructions. This reference will be a valuable resource for security system designers, dealers and installers, security managers, and security consultants.


Key Features
  • Updated to address digital techniques, networking, and the Internet in closed-circuit television
  • Includes brand new sections on CCTV networking, digital video recorders (DVRs), various video compression techniques, and understanding pixels and digital image quality
  • Fully illustrated with dozens of photographs, tables, checklists, charts, diagrams, and instructions

The Protection of Assets Manual (POA)

ASIS has excerpted four parts of Protection of Assets (POA) into an individual reference book and for those who want to learn more about the protection of assets. The topics covered are: Introduction to Assets Protection; Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) Systems; High-Rise Structures; and Integrated Security Systems Design and Specifications.

(Emphasis added)

Effective Physical Security, 5th Ed

Butterworth-Heinemann

This book contains important coverage of environmental design, security surveys, locks, lighting, and CCTV, the latest ISO standards for risk assessment and risk management, physical security planning, network systems infrastructure, and environmental design.

(Emphasis added)

ABOUT THE CRISP SERIES OF REPORTS
Connecting Research in Security to Practice (CRISP) reports provide insights into how different types of security issues can be tackled effectively. Drawing on research and evidence from around the world, each report summarizes the prevailing knowledge about a specific aspect
of security, and then recommends proven approaches to counter the threat. Connecting scientific research with existing security actions helps form good practices. Reports are written to appeal to security practitioners in different types of organizations and at different levels. Readers will inevitably adapt what is presented to meet their own requirements.
They will also consider how they can integrate the recommended actions with existing or planned programs in their organizations.
This CRISP report invites retailers to take a critical look at their handling of Organized Retail Crime (ORC). Chris Richardson and Walter Palmer combine their extensive experience of advising retailers on how to manage security risks with a very helpful summary of previous research, to
stimulate thinking on how best to respond to ORC. Their starting point is that retailers and any others involved need to be clear about the type of ORC problem they are facing and its drivers, as well as the types of measures that are already in place that can be marshalled as part of an
overall approach to making a response effective. They unpick the merits and limits of different types of security and offer a number of frameworks to guide practitioners. In so doing it is likely that this paper will become one of the essential reference points for those who need to tackle the
ORC threat. CRISP reports are sister publications to those produced by Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) of the U.S. Department of Justice, which can be accessed at www.cops.usdoj.gov. While
that series focuses on policing, this one focuses on security.


Martin Gill
Chair, Research Council
ASIS Foundation

ASISSMCalloutImage
***** Intelligent Network Video: Understanding Modern Surveillance Systems. By Fredrik Nilsson; published by CRC Press; available from ASIS, item #1831, 703/519-6200 (phone), www.asisonline.org (Web); 389 pages; $79 (ASIS members), $87 (nonmembers).
This is an exceptional reference book that provides a thorough understanding of the multifaceted products and rapid technological developments of modern video surveillance. Author Fredrik Nilsson expertly describes these systems, the products that compose them, and the characteristics that can sway a buyer’s decision for one feature over another.
Nilsson is an employee of CCTV vendor Axis Communications, so it may be tempting at the outset to dismiss the text’s objectivity. Yet it is Nilsson’s intimate knowledge of these products—and his objectivity—that make this book an excellent choice for your reference library. At no point in reading the book does the reader get the impression that Nilsson is making a one-sided pitch for his company’s products. The topics are described in a balanced fashion, looking at the pros and cons, and the relevant characteristics and details of these systems.
The book is well structured and the examples are relevant. Specific subject matter is easy to find, with clear chapter deline­ation. Not only is the book well-written, but the illustrations are excellent and enhance the reader’s understanding of the text. Similarly, the book’s photographs clearly demonstrate the descriptions in the text. One shortcoming, however, is that interrelated photographs are often spread out over several pages, requiring the reader to constantly flip back-and-forth between pages to understand the comparisons Nilsson is making.
Despite the challenge of constructing a reference for a constantly evolving market, Intelligent Network Video is a top-notch resource that should hold up over time. This text is a must-have for the reader who wants to understand this industry’s ever-changing technologies.
(Emphasis added)

Reviewer: Susan Galla­gher is director of Susan Gallagher Consulting Ltd. in Canada and New Zea­land. She is an independent specialist in security risk management, training, and security program management for the government and private sectors and a member of ASIS International.

When the first edition of Intelligent Network Video was published in 2008, the video surveillance market was still in the early phases of converging to IP-based solutions. Since then, the marketplace has seen incredible technological advances and the widespread adoption of network video solutions.

This timely, second edition presents the rapidly changing technology landscape of vastly improved image quality, better performance, and higher level of intelligence in the systems. All content has been fully revised and updated. Two new chapters cover thermal imaging and hosted video technologies. With over 50 percent more content, including nearly 400 full-color images, Intelligent Network Video, 2nd Ed, is an invaluable reference for industry professionals who want to understand the latest technological advancements in modern video surveillance systems.

It provides the latest details on industry hardware, software, and networking capabilities of the latest cameras and DVRs. It addresses in full detail updated specifications on MPEG-4 and other digital video formats, resolution advantages of analog v. digital, intelligent video capabilities, frame rate control, and indoor/outdoor installations factors. New chapters include cloud computing, standards, and thermal cameras.

Key Features

  • Explains the benefits of digital CCTV over analog video to best maximize networking scalability and video storage capabilities
  • Addresses cutting-edge advances in intelligent video design and its capabilities versus standard digital video
  • Offers the latest specifications on advances in cameras, DVRs, and networking features in IP-based security surveillance and remote monitoring applications
  • Considers many real-world applications and cases
  • Includes new chapters on cloud computing, network video standards, and the latest thermal camera development

Digital Video Surveillance and Security, 2nd Ed

Publisher: Elsevier/Butterworth-Heinemann

Author: Anthony C. Caputo

The use of digital surveillance technology is rapidly growing as it becomes significantly cheaper for live and remote monitoring. The second edition of Digital Video Surveillance and Security provides the most current and complete reference for security professionals and consultants as they plan, design, and implement surveillance systems to secure their places of business.

By providing the necessary explanations of terms, concepts, and technological capabilities, this revised edition addresses the newest technologies and solutions available on the market today. With clear descriptions and detailed illustrations, this book provides for an overall understanding of the digital video surveillance (DVS) ecosystem.

Key Features

  • Highly visual with easy-to-read diagrams, schematics, tables, troubleshooting charts, and graphs
  • Includes design and implementation case studies and best practices
  • Uses vendor-neutral comparisons of the latest camera equipment and recording options

Reviewed in Security Management, 9/15.

I trust that you will retract your erroneous statements forthwith.

Respectfully submitted.

Jeffrey D. Zwirn, Zwirn Corporation

Jeff,

The two main problems with these books are being outdated (much like your advocacy of NICET) and having superficial treatment. It's a big issue given that video surveillance technology changes substantially every few years (e.g., the growth or IR, smart codecs, H.265, WDR, super low light, panoramics, multi-imagers, repositionable multi-imagers, HD analog, etc.).

Digital Video Surveillance and Security, 2nd Ed

Author: Anthony C. Caputo

This book was published 4 years ago, it was superficial when published, it's very outdated today. That it is in the ASIS bookstore is an embarrassment to ASIS and reflects that they either do not know or do not stay on top of removing outdated books.

Intelligent Network Video: Understanding Modern Surveillance Systems. By Fredrik Nilsson

This is Axis sales pitch for IP cameras. The fact the reviewer cannot understand this means they know very little about IP cameras and Axis market strategy. Axis leaves out and downplays any technology it does not sell, e.g., Axis: "Everything is IP" - False.

As for PoA and Effective Physical Security, 5th Ed both have very short (and outdated) sections on video surveillance; too short to begin to touch on the complexity of the domain.

Finally, the Vlado book. For one guy, he does a good job covering engineering fundamentals related to video surveillance but his book omits or covers in just a few lines many of the key technology trends within video surveillance (e.g., the growth or IR, smart codecs, H.265, WDR, super low light, panoramics, multi-imagers, repositionable multi-imagers, HD analog, etc.).

Jeff, you are not an expert in video surveillance (just like I am not an expert in intrusion). The difference is I recognize and respect the complexity in different domains.

The fact that you cite the books you did (e.g., the Caputo one and the PoA) shows that not only are you not an expert in video surveillance, you do not even have a sense of what one needs to know to be an expert in this domain.

Authoritative in what? Certainly not in video surveillance.

There are over 30,000 members in ASIS International. However, with a broad stroke of the IPVM brush, and according to you, no one is authoritative.

The books that I referenced were an exemplar of what ASIS International offers, it does not matter when they were published.

Then in a leap of logic, and according to you, the books prove something far different and inure to me. Surely, this does not past muster under the scientific method or any recognized methodology.

As to your expertise, have you ever testified in trial and been qualified as an expert in anything? In other words, stating your position from Hawaii without ever being cross examined or vetted by a court is quite comfortable. At the same time, having undisclosed persons chime in may be acceptable to IPVM, but, in the real world, it works much differently. Unlike IPVM, there are organizations like ASIS International who have a broad array of expert members, who not only speak, but can actually provide back up to what they posit in all disciplines of Security, including video surveillance; and none of them are undisclosed.

Your utter non-response to contact ASIS International and debate me at a ASIS Internattional conference as I elaborated to you earlier speaks volumes to the value of your pontificating.

The books that I referenced were an exemplar of what ASIS International offers, it does not matter when they were published.

It is a very fundamental point. Technology changes. Resources that are out of date, even if they were once 'expert', are no longer.

Jeff, if you really think it does not matter when a technology book was published, there is no point in discussing further.

John:

The salient point is that there are video surveillance experts who are members of ASIS International. What I directed you to was an exemplar of the publications which ASIS International has at its bookstore. No one is disputing that technology changes. Please respond to the information listed below:

[Second Request]

As to your expertise, have you ever testified in trial and been qualified as an expert in anything? In other words, stating your position from Hawaii without ever being cross examined or vetted by a court is quite comfortable. At the same time, having undisclosed persons chime in may be acceptable to IPVM, but, in the real world, it works much differently. Unlike IPVM, there are organizations like ASIS International who have a broad array of expert members, who not only speak, but can actually provide back up to what they posit in all disciplines of Security, including video surveillance; and none of them are undisclosed.

Your utter non-response to contact ASIS International and debate me at a ASIS Internattional conference as I elaborated to you earlier speaks volumes to the value of your pontificating.

https://www.asisonline.org/globalassets/professional-development/2018-nycprospectus_final.pdf

The salient point is that there are video surveillance experts who are members of ASIS International.

By that flawed logic, IPVM is by far the most expert since we have far more video surveillance experts who are IPVM members than ASIS. Think about it, few senior technologists at video surveillance developers join ASIS; many, if not most join IPVM because of the focused research and reporting we do.

But the real test of an organization is what the organization's own team does in a domain. Our work in our various books and tests speaks for itself. What does ASIS itself produce in video surveillance? Almost nothing.

What I directed you to was an exemplar of the publications which ASIS International has at its bookstore. No one is disputing that technology changes.

And if you were even a middling expert in video surveillance, you would have recognized the Caputo book was out of date and would not have cited it.

stating your position from Hawaii

That is simply an ad hominem attack. Whether one is in Hawaii or New Jersey or Kentucky does nothing to prove or disprove one's expertise.

ever being cross examined or vetted by a court is quite comfortable

Courts and attornies know very little about video surveillance technology, much like video surveillance experts know little about the law. So a court is incapable of proving or disproving one's expertise in video surveillance, or French literature, or quantum mechanics, etc.

IPVM is examined, vetted and attacked every week. Jeff, I know IPVM is new to you but for a decade now, we have top people across the industry debate us continuously. That is part of the reason why we have become so good, is that we allow experts (and people like yourself) to criticize us continuously.

Let me turn it back on you. You say you are an expert in video surveillance technology. What publications in video surveillance have you released in the past 2 years?

John:

I expected your non-responsive reply. You simply deflect.

I asked you for specifics regarding your expertise and if you had ever been qualified as an expert in anything. Your choose not to respond for obvious reasons. The same holds true as to my offer to debate you from behind the IPVM curtain, and instead; at any U.S. based ASIS International Conference; so you would not have the luxury to continue to pontificate from Hawaii. You choose not to respond to this offer as well for the same obvious reasons.

My point of commenting on your venue is that it is one thing to spew out your unsupported statements over the IPVM network from behind your computer in Hawaii, compared to having to be challenged in real time with qualified experts.

Each expert report which I prepare is based on recognized methodologies. Having said that. and despite your inexperience, both state and federal courts across the country generally do an excellent job in vetting experts of all disciplines. Concurrently, opposing counsel is also duty bound to aggressively cross examine the expert and each of his/her opinions. To suggest otherwise as you have done is simply erroneous.

As to my publications, I have not published any books on video surveillance to the public. On the other hand, my expert video surveillance curriculum is only available to law enforcement.

Given that, for more than 18 years, I have created advanced curriculum and taught local and federal law enforcement agencies about video surveillance systems and the joint terrorism task force as well, in my appointed position as a Designated Expert Instructor for the NYPD

Coming full circle, your inflammatory comments are done by design, and similarly your constantly expanding discussions are much in the same manner.

Against the foregoing backdrop and glaringly, you believe that ASIS, NFPA, SIA, SSI, SDM, CSAA, ESA, NICET, AFAA, and all of the courts on both the State and Federal Levels across the United States are not qualified to either be video surveillance experts or qualify experts like myself, in video surveillance systems.

Realistically, if you had appeared at any reputable, qualified and professional organizational event venue, as elaborated to previously, your outrageous belief system would demonstrate how much you do not know; by experts who do know; and perform their work in an expert and diligent fashion each and everyday.

People in the know, recognize where you make your money from, and that no matter how much you defy logic, just like many of your undisclosed members do, your commentary is pernicious.

As you are well aware, I gave you an invitation and opportunity to prove that your competency, or lack thereof; could easily be tested and quantified following a scientific methodology. This is especially significant given your rhetoric about everyone else.

It is axiomatic why you opted to remain completely silent.

Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey D. Zwirn, CPP, CFPS, CFE, FACFEI, CHS-IV, SET, CCI, FASI&T, MBAT, President

NOTICE: This comment has been moved to its own discussion: If You Had Appeared At Any Reputable, Qualified And Professional Organizational Event Venue, Your Outrageous Belief System Would Demonstrate How Much You Do Not Know

Jeff, John did respond to many points of yours, albeit from the fake land of Hawaii. But apparently nothing he says matters because it's not at an approved ASIS location. And it's quite funny how you infer that one needs to be grilled in a court of law to be an expert. The most knowledgeable people I come across in this industry are in the field and not overly concerned with ASIS schmooze fests.

Carl K, X

the boss

Carl:

Thank you for your feedback.

I suggest that you read the entire messaging.

The points made are not limited to ASIS, or the courts, or to Hawaii. John believes that no one is credible except for him, IPVM and its undisclosed and disclosed members. In essence, John has called out ASIS, NFPA, SDM, SSI, NICET, AFAA, All State and Federal Court Judges and others.

Having said that, his positions are nonsensical.

John believes that no one is credible except for him

That is absolutely incorrect.

There are many many integrators who are very very credible. There are many manufacturer senior people, especially on the technical side, who are very credible.

With all due respect to judges and their legal expertise, they are not experts in video surveillance nor radiology nor coaching gymnastics, etc. I am not going point by point for your various favorite organizations.

My meta point is there are many experts in video surveillance, overwhelmingly found in those who specialize in it daily, such as integrators and manufacturers.

John:

Remember, many of the companies and persons who you refer to are not only experts, but they are members of the organizations that you criticize, and many of these experts also subscribe and read the magazines that you criticize as well.

Let your meta point be responding to my questions instead of continually deflecting and being completely non-responsive.

Case Closed

they are members of the organizations that you criticize, and many of these experts also subscribe and read the magazines that you criticize as well.

Jeff, I read trade magazines from time to time (ads, press releases, canned manufacturer interviews) but that does not reflect one way or another on the trade magazines expertise.

In the same way, it would be absurd for me to say because the CTOs of most video surveillance manufacturers subscribe to IPVM, that somehow those CTO's knowledge is part of IPVM.

By your logic, since you 'read' IPVM, I should count your 'expertise' as our own.

PLEASE RESPOND to my questions instead of continually deflecting and being completely non-responsive.

Jeff, I have read it all and agree with John. Personally, that alphabet soup that follows your name doesn't mean shit to me. As I have stated before in different ways, I know more experts that don't have "credentials" than I know idiots that have "credentials".
As for everything else you stated above, it's false.

What's the best part about beating your head against the wall,... it feels food when you stop.

Goodbye Jeff.

John:

I am not looking to impress you.

There is nothing to counter here.

ASIS SSI, SDM, NFPA, ESA, ASCET, CSAA, and SIA are all authoritative and credible regardless if they have paid advertisers or not. I suggest that you become a member of each of these organizations; you could learn a lot.

Jeff,

Is there a chance you could get Scott Goldfine to refuse all advertiser money?

Or at least disclose by manufacturer in the heading how much they pay the magazine?

This single feature of IPVM, of which they are VERY adamant is why I recommend this site to customers even when press about my company isn’t always positive.

I appreciate all the opinions from various posters, based on their personal skill sets and preferences. I treat them as opinions like editorials in the newspaper.

Finally, as for SSI's professionalism, SSI has so little shame that they are running a 'partner series' with manufacturers, like Dahua below:

No shame can be a good thing, at least they are in your face about it. As opposed to the SourceSecurity method.

John:

Astonishingly, you believe that ASIS SSI, SDM, NFPA, ESA, ASCET, CSAA, and SIA serve no purpose, and only IPVM is credible. This positioning that you defend defies logic.

Jeff, that is obviously not my position and you either are not discussing here in good faith or you are very bad at understanding other's positions.

I have never said nor suggested they 'serve no purpose'.

The purpose of the trade magazines, for example, is to be a marketing vehicle for manufacturers. Given that 80% of what they run is manufacturer written content, copied press releases and advertisements, that is pretty straightforward for most reasonable people to understand.

That's a purpose, for sure.

Most magazines are publishers that make money off of their advertisers. Just like the New York Times, just because SSI gets paid advertising does not mean that they fail in what they do. To the contrary, the substance of what they provide to the industry is invaluable and the same holds true for SDM Magazine as well.

I have been reading these magazines for decades, and up to date, they are relevant and very valuable. I do not need anymore than my own personal experience to support my opinions. All persons who do not support my position have likely not read the magazines and if you do read the magazines, then why are you still doing same if you truly do not believe that that SSI runs a very professional organization?

I remember when Consumer Reports tested the Radio Shack Alarm System and said it was very good. (Not verbatim) It was wrong then and nothing has changed. All of the independent testing in the world does not change hands-on experience in the field.

Just like the New York Times, just because SSI gets paid advertising does not mean that they fail in what they do...

Can you link to any articles that are highly critical of vendors who adversitise in the magazine?

I would settle for lightly critical.

Well, at the time, considering the products available to the professional industry when the Radio Shack alarm was tested, it wasn’t too far behind. It was more advanced than sigma relays and dry cells in a bell box with an ace shunt lock as a local alarm. It had indicator lamps!

With that said, I don’t mean to demean SSI, SDM, AID or any of the trade or association magazines, or their business model. It works for them.

Having been on the manufacturing side for over 25 years and another 15 previously on the integrator side I can tell you there are “gaps in truth” in many of the articles about projects and systems when submitted by the manufacturer or installing contractor.

I enjoy reading many of them.

I installed hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of products in the 70s and 80s and to suggest that Radio Shack wasn't far behind the professional alarm manufacturer products which were available at that is simply ludicrous and junk science,

Just like the New York Times, just because SSI gets paid advertising does not mean that they fail in what they do.

Jeff, there are a number of important structural differences between international newspapers and industry trade magazines that impact their ability to report.

First is the breadth of advertisers. In the security industry, there are just ~100 companies that can justify advertising (and you see the same companies in the front of magazines every month - Dahua, Hikvision, etc.) since what they cover is so niche. In international newspapers, there are literally hundreds of thousands of advertisers since they cover such a broad array of mainstream topics.

Second is the scale of readership. The NYTimes has nearly 100 millions visitors to their website per month. SSI's own media kit reports 50,000 monthly visitors. The NYTimes getting 2,000x more visits lets them have a much wider advertising base and far more independence from any individual advertiser's objection.

The third is paying subscribers, The NYTimes has 3+ million, SSI has 0. Having subscribers not only makes the NYTimes more independent of advertisers, it makes them more responsive to the needs of their readers who pay them an increasingly large share of their revenue.

Jeff, I don't imagine that I am going to change your mind on SSI. My goal here though is to lay out some important facts so you can better understand why SSI, SSN, SIW, etc. are far different structurally and far more vulnerable to advertiser pressure than the NYTimes.

Finally, since you know Scott, ask him whether if he ran something critical of Dahua or Hikvision, whether he would risk Dahua or Hikvision cutting off advertising with them? The only truthful answer is yes. Then ask him why SSI has run nothing on the 2 WSJ reports including Hikvision being removed from a US Army base but SSI found a press release of a Hikvision / Texas high school partnership to be editorially newsworthy.

John:

I will let Scott speak for himself. Under your suggestion, all trade publications are not professional if they do not follow your model. That is nonsense.

Jeff, you compared SSI to the NYTimes. I answered with a series of facts and evidence showing how they were radically different. Instead of you offering your own evidence that would disprove mine, you just called my position 'nonsense'.

John:

I do not need to dispute "your evidence". My position is clear and speaks for itself. Please look at my other response to your comments on the new topic of discussion as well. Remember, your series of facts and evidence is not germane to whether or not SSI is authoritative. I stand by my statements.

Jeff, let's add this new SSI story:

So SSI has in the last 2 weeks covered a state school partnership and a distributor award for ADI but not being removed from an Army base nor Congressional hearings featuring Hikvision.

You can keep on naively believing this has nothing to do with Hikvision's advertising but the reality is obvious.

"I do not need anymore than my own personal experience to support my opinions. All persons who do not support my position have likely not read the magazines"

The above position you posit is exactly why I stopped trying to debate anything with you. (The italicized portion is spectacularly obtuse).

It shows - at least to me - that your own perspective is the only one that you are able to ascribe any value to, and on top of that (or maybe because of it) you have no ability to comprehend any one else's perspective.

Therefore you cease being an advocate and move into the realm of being a zealot.

Regards,

Undisclosed poster #5

Please feel free to do your own research. Both SDM and SSI are critically important to the alarm industry. I do not need a critical article about any entity to change their worth to me and the tens of thousands of readers who read same.

Both SDM and SSI are critically important to the alarm industry.

Because they function as a surreptitious marketing co-op?

Your comments are erroneous.

Ok, I’ll bite.

Tell me what information is critically important in a magazine which refrains from publishing negative information about its sponsors; the same sponsors that, coincidentally feature in most of the content?

Clearinghouse for industry announcements?

Invariably, Trade publications serve an important function and purpose in the alarm and security industry, and in other industries and trades. To suggest otherwise as elaborated to above, it just plain erroneous on your part.

Are you also suggesting that the magazine for ASIS International, Security Management, is not professional as well? If so, it just further amplifies what you do not know.

JZ: Both SDM and SSI are critically important to the alarm industry.

U4: For marketing?

JZ: Your comments are erroneous.

U4: Ok. Tell me what information [that SDM and SSI provide] is critically important?

JZ: Invariably, Trade publications serve an important function and purpose in the alarm and security industry, and in other industries and trades. To suggest otherwise as elaborated to above, it just plain erroneous on your part.

At this point one might naturally ask “And what important function and purpose is that?”, except I know the answer already: “critical and important information”.

Also, I’m trying to avoid another “erroneous” award for asking a natural question.

I’m tautology confused.

New from SSI:

Perhaps watching a guy have a battery explode in his face is funny to some but what is the value or relevance to professional security people? And this is SSI's weekly series, not a random post.

SSI appears to be a very professional organization indeed

Thank you Brandon, for clarity here.

I’m not sure whether you are being sarcastic or not realizing Brandon was.

However, as a show of faith I have voted you “funny” until further evidence emerges ;)

More 'professionalism' from SSI.

Nest IQ has made SSI's list of: 7 4K Security Cameras for Every Application. The problem is that the Nest IQ is not a 4K camera at all. Nest knows this, that's why they don't refer to it as a '4K camera' but as having a '4K sensor'.

Despite this, SSI wrongly declares:

So, the Nest IQ is not a 4K camera. Moreover, any true 4K camera can provide the zoom capabiities of Nest's 4K 'zoom'. The benefit of real 4K cameras is that they provide true 4K resolution and digital zoom, not just a 1080p insert / zoom sub-section from a 4K sensor.

Since very few people actually read SSI, such an error is something I would normally just ignore but for the benefit of Jeff, I share.

Jeff, I am sure you will be pointing out my lack of industry credentials as a counterargument to the fundamental facts of the matter. Please do, sir.

Despite this, SSI wrongly declares:

To be fair to SSI, it would appear that paragraph was lifted straight out of a (uncredited) CEPro article ;)

So it's better that it's plagiarized? :)

Btw, CEPro and SSI are parts of the same company. In SSI, it is published under the byline of SSI's web editor.

So if they are part of the same company, why not link to the much more in-depth cepro article?

Do you have on example where CEPro or Jason Knott its editior made negative comments about IPVM?

Do you have on example where CEPro or Jason Knott its editior made negative comments about IPVM?

What they are saying is factually wrong.

Jeff, you are more concerned that I am being mean or out of line to SSI / CEPro than the fact their 'professionals' are publishing factually wrong claims.

At the very least, you have a 'stylistic' difference than us and the rest of modern social media and communications. I would encourage you to get used to this because the world is not returning to the 1990s model of a limited number of 'authorities' publishing only nice things about each other.

Jeff, more 'negative comments' about SSI from me last year: Manufacturers, Security Sales Magazine Is Tricking You

You have a choice. (1) You can accept that what they are doing is deceptive and wrong. (2) You can complain about me being mean to them. I look forward to your choice.

John

I am not at all concerned with you being mean or out of line. That should be your concern. If there is anything from SSI or CE Pro that is factually wrong, please direct your comments to the respective parties.

IPVM should take your advice and make corrections as well: you can start with the IPVM analysis of my Simpli-Safe article, which I have repeatedly told you is woefully flawed.

IPVM is a very good concept so that is not disputed. Lets focus on what is wrong with IPVM and make it right!

Trade-ragging on IPVM is rare, but not unheard of:

The rumor apparently originated from a remotely-placed security analyst and was started to create controversy prior to the start of MIPS.

Taking the stage for an opening keynote speech, Thinggaard asked how many people in the audience follow this analysts’ blog. So few hands were raised in the air, you couldn’t populate a six-year-olds’ birthday cake with an equivalent number of candles.

[IPVM note, related: Milestone Admits IPO Plan Lie]

If you have any issues with the contents of SSI or CE Pro please direct you comments to the respective parties.

Now you're just commenting to build points for your subscription.

John:

Thank you for your comment. People in glass houses should not throw stones. Both your model and others work for their respective target audiences. Do you have one example where SSI made negative comments about IPVM?

Do you have one example where SSI made negative comments about IPVM?

Jeff - Part of the overall point here is that SSI does not generally make negative comments about anything, despite there being plenty of opportunities to publish critical commentary of companies and events.

Brian:

Look at the Siimpli-Safe article that I wrote after they requested same and there are many more examples, but you need to either read SSI magazine or look for same, In fact, one of your members did just that.

Having said that, and curiously, IPVM never advised me that they were publishing their opinion on my article and got it completely and utterly wrong.

As you know, I was only recently advised of same and have made some comments. Further, the so-called critique by IPVM was grossly inaccurate and erroneous. By way of example, IPVM disputes that the Simpli-Safe "control panel" on a household fire alarm system (which is being monitored by a remote station) is required to be Listed by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL). Certainly, I have the right to expect competency if someone is going to be the critic, but what I read was simply wrong.

Likewise, according to the drum beat of the IPVM criticisms, it essentially does not matter that the control panel by Simpi-Safe does not comply with NFPA 72.

Shame on IPVM. There is so much more that was remarkably flawed it was incredulous. For brevity, not once did IPVM ever contact Simpl-Safe and this company never once responded to my article or to IPVM that I am aware of.

Additionally, Simpl-Safe never once responded to SSI even though they were repeatedly asked for comment. Clearly, if something was wrong with my forensic investigation, reasonable persons would have expected a response and defense, not utter silence.

Lets re-open up the debate on Simpl-safe and then maybe IPVM can get it right,

The foregoing opinions are held to a reasonable degree of forensic, technical and professional certainty.

Jeffrey D. Zwirn, President Zwirn Corporation

www.alarmexpert.com

People in glass houses should not throw stones.

But people in stone houses can throw these all day:

Now you are knocking the Sammy's..?

Now you are knocking the Sammy's..?

Of course not, some things are sacred. And you’re not gonna see me go for a cheap laugh by knocking the Slammy’s.

John,

You gotta give SSI a break, here is a very relevant article (yes this is 2018) about moving from analog to ip video written by the product manager of the top ip mfg - Pelco:

https://www.securitysales.com/surveillance/10-steps-avoid-ip-video-issues/

Thank you Paul

Sorry Jeff I was being sarcastic, taking advice on ip video from Pelco would be like taking advice on marriage from Larry King

Jeffrey, this is Central Station.

Sorry to bother you but we’re showing an open circuit for Zone 1, possibly due to a blown sarcasm detector.

Can I use Undisclosed #4 as my emergency contact? LOL

Jeff, are you by any chance related to a "Marty"?

Call me to discuss. There are several.

Jeffrey D. Zwirn, President, Zwirn Corporation

This was incredibly entertaining to read. Maybe IPVM should have a weekly guest commenter/troll that just comes in and argues inanely with everyone, misses sarcasm, and makes increasingly circular arguments.

Prior to this thread I don't believe I have ever looked at SSI. Interesting thing I noticed - if I turn on ad-blocker the website is a blank page.

Has the feel of 99.9% advertising with a dash of content. I like it to see new products.

It’s worth every cent I paid for it ;)

When there’s that many ads YOU are the product.

Ads or lack thereof do not define the organization; their members and what they actually provide to the industry and do and/or in some cases do not provide is what is important to focus on. The competency of each member also needs to be taken into consideration.

NOTICE: This comment has been moved to its own discussion: Ads Or Lack Thereof Do Not Define The Organization

Sorry, but I have never spent more than 30sec skimming through the adds in an SSI magazine and never looked at the site before this thread. What does SSI do exactly provide for the industry? Why as an IP video dealer should I become a member if there is such a thing?

SSI is a monthly trade publication. As to memberships I am referring to ASIS International, NFPA, CSAA, now known as the Monitoring Association, the Security Industry Association, AFAA and ASCET. There are many more but this is a staring place. In some of these organizations they have specialty interest groups.

Ok which one specifically for IP video, please.

It really depends what you are looking to achieve.

ASIS International is the worlds largest security organization so their resources are amazing.

Your local alarm association can also be very helpful.

The Electronic Security Association (ESA)

NICET is has a Video Certification Program to the extent that you want to try to qualify to achieve certifications.

The Security Industry Association is another possible resource to you.

Of course, IPVM membership for the services which you provide would be another excellent resource. That said, if you are on this site you should already know that.

Jeff, I'm trying to better understand your position. As a security management practitioner, I have many decades of experience with ASIS, and almost none with ESA and the others.

Are you comparing ASIS to IPVM and suggesting ASIS is professional and IPVM is not? They are miles apart in their approach to a related audience. In my opinion ASIS is best for security management procedures and IPVM is better for industry and product information.

I left ASIS for many reasons, mostly because of self-promoting thought leaders.

Jeff, I have quickly reviewed the NICET Video Security Systems Technician Cert and it seems geared towards analog gear. I see lots of mentions about DVRs, Multiplexers, serial communications. Seams way behind the times. Do they not have anything with modern info about IP video systems?

Hi Mike:

Here is some information on the NICET Program. I am not sure of the entire scope of their testing curriculum. Please call them for further details. Certification By NICET is sponsored by the National Society of Professional Engineers. NICET was founded to improve the quality of engineering and technical services through a comprehensive examination program for engineering technicians.

As a nationally recognized examining body, the NICET Institute comprehensively evaluates the qualifications of technicians applying for testing certification. Technicians must present verification of their experience, competency, and knowledge. In addition, only with clearly demonstrated experience, achievement, expertise, and successful passing of NICET’s written competency tests, can technicians attain NICET’s credentialing standards. When a technician satisfactorily meets all of the criteria, the Institute will issue certification, recognizing that through education, experience, and knowledge this person has met the standards set forth by this institute. In addition, continuing professional development points (CPD) are required to maintain the NICET certification.

NICET Certification carries the clout of a third-party, standards-based credential, granted by the oldest and most respected certifying organization for engineering technicians and technologists.

Level I Exam Levels I and II Exam Levels I, II, and III Exam Levels I, II, III, and IV Exam
Work Experience- Provide complete, detailed position descriptions and time allocations showing:
At least three months of significant hands-on installation/service experience At least two years of significant hands-on installation/service experience At least four years of significant hands-on installation/service experience At least seven years of significant hands-on installation/service experience
Performance Measures- Obtain Supervisor verification of:
All Level I Performance Measures

All Level I and II Performance Measures

Includes three video security system projects or sections of projects that meet the following criteria:

  • meet or exceed the criteria for a Type A system
  • personally installed, powered-up, and tested by the candidate
  • one or more completed within the 6 months prior to the submittal date

All Level I, II, and III Performance Measures

Includes five video security system projects or sections of projects that meet the following criteria:

  • three or more meet or exceed the criteria for a Type B system
  • personally installed by, or installed under the direct supervision of, the candidate
  • personally powered-up and tested by the candidate
  • one or more Type B projects completed within the 12 months prior to the submittal date

All Level I, II, III, and IV Performance Measures

Includes seven video security system projects or sections of projects that meet the following criteria:

  • five or more meet or exceed the criteria for a Type B systems
    • personally installed by, or installed under the direct supervision of the candidate
  • three or more meet exceed the criteria for a Type C system
    • installation personally managed/supervised by the candidate
    • system personally programmed, powered-up, and tested by the candidate
  • one or more Type C projects completed within the 3 years prior to the submittal date

NICET Certification carries the clout of a third-party, standards-based credential, granted by the oldest [emphasis added]

Yes, that is Michael and other's concern. This is technology. Being the oldest is not a good thing, especially when their training / education / certification is so out of date.

Being an expert in 10-year-old technology makes one a historian, not a technologist.

Certification carries the clout of a third-party, standards-based credential, granted by the oldest and most respected certifying organization for engineering technicians and technologists.

Jeffrey, at this point I doubt anyone really doubts that you are ‘certifiable’.

IPVM :-)

So,... when should I expect to start seeing daily funny videos here?